Do, for example, self-citations from one's own preprints also count? There are scholars with huge Google Scholar citation count because they self-cite a lot, but when you look them up on Scopus, they practically don't exist.
There are also people who cite only celebrity scholars because they think that's what will make them look smart.
There are people who cite mostly stuff published in recognised journals because they think that's more reliable, "proper science". Plus, some are lazy.
Some cite what others cite without even reading the cited source. If you don't believe me, ask Meyer & Rowan 1977 and Powell & Dimaggio 1983.
Some folks cite tend to hyper-cite their friends and colleagues. Or editors of the journal they publish in.
How we cite is an incredibly important topic. Citation practices have a profound effect on scholarship.
We need to think about how to cite better, how to decolonise our libraries, and how to responsibly use our power as 'knowledge creators."
Think before you cite!
In the end, it's not about whether citations matter, everyone knows they do, often in ways they are not supposed to matter.
It's about how we interpret citation counts and the dangers lying in assuming that high count automatically means good stuff.
Not all citations are equal.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh